2004 (10) TMI 524

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... Shri N.K. Arora, Advocate, for the Respondent. [Order per : V.K. Agrawal, Member (T)]. -  The Revenue has filed this appeal praying for imposition of penalty on M/s. Bharat Steel Rolling Mills. Shri Vikas Kumar, learned SDR, submitted that M/s. Bharat Steel Rolling Mills manufacture M.S. bars, rods, etc. which are liable to pay Central Excise duty on the basis of Annual Capacity of Pr....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....itially the Annual Capacity of Production of the Appellants was provisionally determined by Order dated 3-10-97 and it was finalized by Order dated 30-3-98; that subsequently as the Respondents had changed the parameters of their action in the month of April, 1998 the Annual Capacity of Production was revised and re-determined by the Commissioner vide Order dated 3-2-99 w.e.f. 1-5-98. He contended....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....s. 50,000/- on 7-5-98; that again in the month of June, 1998 the Respondents had deposited another Rs. 50,000/- and thereafter another Rs. 50,000/- was deposited by them. He further submitted that they had changed the parameters of their mill after taking permission from the proper authority and had applied for re-determination of their Annual Capacity of Production in April, 1998; that as the Com....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... of both the sides. Rule 96ZP(3) of the Central Excise Rules, 1944 provided that where a manufacturer fails to pay whole of the duty payable for any month, he shall be liable to pay the outstanding amount of duty along with interest and a penalty equivalent to the amount of duty outstanding from him at the end of such month or Rs. 5,000/- whichever is greater. It is not disputed by the Respondents....